mr no mates
It seems to me that part of National's strategy at this election is to get rid of two of its most likely coalition partners. The Act scenario has been discussed ad infinitum (and ad nauseum, although I'm sure that won't stop me posting about it again soon), but I think sagenz has made an interesting point in his post about Winston resembling heated bread.
Sagenz points out that Bob Clarkson is "a well respected local [who] has the numbers to eject Winston." National would surely have known this, or at least had a fair idea, when they selected their candidate, so it must have been their intention to try to remove Winston from the game.
It's pretty obvious to anyone who watches NZ politics that Peters is a man to whom loyalty is important. He gets snippy with journalists on a regular basis because they aren't as nice to him in print or on the radio as they are in the bar, as Jane Clifton pointed out in a North and South interview recently.
So if Clarkson wins Tauranga but Winston gets back in by breaking 5% then any possible coalition talks with National are going to be very interesting indeed...
7 comments:
yes i'd agree that Peters has an interesting take on what loyalty is - which basically comes down to the simple equation of do what i say not what i do.
Seems national still has delusions of grandeur that they can govern alone just like in the good old days
Hmmm. David Farrar recently made a comment that Winston losing Tauranga is good for the country, because it will make him much more reluctant to pull the rug on a Government.
It seems National party policy is to take his seat, pray he makes it over the threshold and then hope that losing his seat makes him more compliant. I've heard from someone else that John Key believes he will be a pushover in Government.
I'd say Key is either banking on him being PM in 2008, or he has some secret insight into Winston's character we don't.
Yes Span, I have been having identical thoughts. It looks like any National led government is going to need NZ first.
The easiest way to help NZ first is of course to not win Tauranga, but this would not be done to the local National party organisation, just as National won't do this in Epsom for ACT. ACT however will probably only get between zero and 3 to 4 seats, whereas Winston could bring significantly more.
On the flip side of the coin ACT would only go with National, whereas Winston could go with whoever annoys him less.
I'd guess that if any local party is presented with a candidate with money and local support they'll take them - I'd doubt they'd turn around and say "sorry, but we don't really want to win here".
what about in Wigram - Mike Mora appears to have been running, and making no headway, for centuries. You can't tell me there are no other options...
I wonder if my old friend B.J. (Blair) Anderson from the 'PCP Coalition' is standing in Wigram against Anderton again this election. Anderton was apoplectic at the last election, especially very early on when Blair was actually polling ahead of him.
You could always contact him via his website, www.mildgreens.com
Blair is a very interesting and engaging person, with a great passion for public debate.
I think I'm in a group photo on the site he posted somewhere of friends outside his Christchurch home.
Post a Comment